Additional file 1 of Metagenomics insights into responses of rhizobacteria and their alleviation role in licorice allelopathy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Additional file 1: Table S1. PCR primers used in this study. HMGR, 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutary coenzyme A reductase gene; β-AS, bamyrin synthetase gene; CYP88D6 and CYP72A154, cytochrome P450 monooxygenases gene; LUS, lupeol synthase gene; CHS, chalcone synthase gene; β-actin and 18s rRNA reference gene. Table S2. Quantitative nested real-time PCR (qNRT-PCR) primers of inoculants. Table S3. Allelochemical content in rhizosphere soil after distinct inoculants. Table S4. Screened pangenomes related to housekeeping functions of four isolates. Fig. S1. The network (a) and Zi-Pi plot (b) composed of persistent taxa based on Spearman correlation method. Fig. S2. Plate confrontation experiment between colonies of E (Ensifer sesbaniae) and N (Novosphingobium resinovorum) inoculants. Fig. S3. Bar plots of gene copy numbers of colonization of rhizobacterial inoculants under different inoculants and exogenous glycyrrhizin addition. I, initial sampling stage; A, allelochemical treatment; W, water treatment; C, control: no inoculants, N, Novosphingobium resinovorum inoculants; E, Ensifer sesbaniae inoculants; S, synthetic inoculants. Different letters indicate significant differences (P < 0.05; One-way ANOVA, Tukey’s HSD test).
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.782 | 0.139 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".